We live in a day in which biblical Christianity is becoming increasingly rare in the West. Sadly, even most biblical Christianity is blighted by many weaknesses in the forms of unbiblical traditions, false teachings, glaring and besetting sins, and compromise. The body of Jesus in the West is largely desperately sick, weak, and unfaithful. Although I personally believe that there have been a few small revivals in recent decades that have recovered some doctrinal and practical faithfulness, most of the western body is in desperate need for more, deep, and widespread revival and reform. As I recently noted, a popular model that many Christians have looked to to learn how to reform western Christianity is the Protestant Reformation of the 16th century AD. Yet, most believers are woefully ignorant of the true nature of most of this Reformation, and of its key players, means of operation, and results.

Among the several misconceptions about the Reformation is that the most well-known leaders of it were the most faithful and successful at bringing about reformation back to many of the lost apostolic teachings and practices. I’m speaking of such leaders as Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and Knox. Although they accomplished much for the good of souls, and the revival of true Christianity in their spheres, they actually weren’t the most faithful to holy Scripture and their own motto of sola Scriptura. The true reformers during the 1500s in Europe were a group of believers that were — and still are — considered to have little significance, and little to offer in the way of a godly example for obeying the Scriptures, and advancing God’s kingdom. If we want to look back at the Reformation to find inspiration, encouragement, and instruction in correcting our unbiblical beliefs and practices through a devotion to Scripture, the best examples are to be found in the believers that have been dubbed the Radical Reformers, or Anabaptists.

The Anabaptists have been discredited by many historians over the centuries, but they accomplished a great deal more than the Magisterial Reformers in bringing about a revival of New Testament Christianity, and this under the fiercest opposition from Roman Catholics, ruthless governments, and other Protestants. They endured the same things that the first Christians did from both the world and the so-called “church” mostly for being faithful to the Scriptures, and to their genuinely-held convictions based on the Scriptures. They recovered both the true nature of the body of Jesus, and recognized a more accurate relationship between said body and the governments of this world, promoting religious liberty, and the legitimate separation of the spiritual church, and the earthly state. Sadly, some of the fiercest opposition they suffered came by the decisions of the most prominent Reformers, including Zwingli and Luther. And yet, like the first Christians, the Anabaptists refused to repay evil with evil, but loved and forgave their persecutors, whom they called to repentance and eternal life. We do well to remember the examples of most of the Anabaptists (and the bad examples), and to seek to emulate their zeal, courage, and love for one another, and their deceived adversaries. It will only be if we largely follow their example, and avoid much of what the Reformers did, that we’ll be able to bring about true reformation toward a purer obedience to the apostolic teachings.

I’d like to briefly outline some of the main ways that these brave Christians brought about genuine reform in specific areas of New Testament beliefs and practices.

Reform in Baptism

As should be obvious to anyone who understands what the name, “Anabaptist,” means (i.e. “rebaptizer”), the chief area of Christian life to which they brought reform was that of baptism, and by extension, to what it means to be a Christian. During the Reformation, baptism, as it was called, was usually granted to infants, and this because most Europeans were automatically devoted to attending Church services, and so automatically assumed to be “church members” from soon after birth. This practice was simply assumed to be biblical by all the magisterial Reformers and Reformed churches, since the fundamental structure of these churches was barely changed. They were considered to be integral parts of the European towns, cities, and countries where Protestants arose, and so most communities and governments expected all citizens to at least outwardly take part in the weekly meetings of the churches as ostensive members. As such, all considerate members of the community were expected to allow their children to be baptized. In other words, the union of church, state, and society was still mostly untouched, and formerly Roman Catholic societies simply transitioned to an outwardly Protestant society, with all citizens who wanted to be respectable becoming members of the new churches.

Rushing in obnoxious opposition to this unbiblical state of things came the Anabaptists, who began their movement among some of the Protestant leaders in Zurich, Switzerland. They were former followers of Zwingli, and discovered through their diligent studies of the Scriptures that baptism was an ordinance meant to be practiced only by believers who made a profession of faith in the gospel. They saw that, due to the testifying purpose from the baptized to the baptizer in the Bible, the baptism of infants has no biblical purpose, and simply doesn’t count as the baptism that the New Testament disciples practiced.

Having discovered this groundbreaking teaching, they were impelled by love for the Lord to be truly baptized in obedience, and did so in 1525. Soon after, they began diligently preaching and teaching the necessity of being baptized as a believer to all who would listen in the city. Sadly, they were strongly opposed by Zwingli and the Zurich government, and eventually forced out of the city. However, they continued to preach believer’s baptism in the countryside of Switzerland, and hundreds, if not thousands, joined the movement within a couple of years.

The implications of believer’s baptism were enormous. No longer could someone considering the gospel preached by the Anabapists just assume he was a part of Christ’s body due to his infant “baptism” and church attendance. A radical step of displaying a public profession of faith through baptism was preached from the Scriptures. And to obey this call was to bring upon a person shame, reproach, and even imprisonment, and eventually death. Within a few years, most of the chief Anabaptist leaders were executed not only by Roman Catholics, but also “Protestant” authorities. Yet, the congregations that were established were mostly made up of true believers, who lived holy lives, and preached the gospel to their neighbors. Protestantism had entered a new era of New Testament reform, and the body of Christ grew in its maturity and impact on the souls of sinners, whether they were non-Christian or “Christian” in name only.

Reform in Godly Separation

Stemming from the fact that the Anabaptists recognized no “visible church” composed of both believers and unbelievers, but only considered those who repented and accepted baptism as a part of the spiritual body of Jesus, they also inevitably practiced the separation of the Christian assembly from political bodies, as well as from all groups that were opposed to Jesus. Although many of them took this distinctive too far by condemning any participation in serving as a governor in the state, they at least were right in insisting that the state has no part in funding or enforcing a religious body. They were some of the first European proponents of the separation of church and state, and of freedom of conscience in matters of religion. Of course, part of this was due to the fact that it was impossible for them to have any close supportive connection with any of the governments they were under, since they opposed both Reformed and Catholic doctrine and practices. Nevertheless, their fundamental basis for holding to this view was their study of the Scriptures. The main passage they used to support it was the Lord’s own instructions that one should “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Mk. 12:17). In this one saying is found the basis of the teaching of two distinct spheres of authority, that are not to be mixed. On the one hand, earthly governments have their own delegated authority from God, and on the other, the body of Jesus has its own separate authority. While governments are instituted to deal with matters of peace and order in society, the assembly of Jesus is primarily responsible for benefiting people’s souls with eternal salvation, and declaring their eternal condemnation if they ultimately and utterly reject the gospel of the Savior. To put it theologically, there are two kingdoms on this earth — that of earthly man seen through governments, and that of the Lord which is seen in His people working together for the advancement of the gospel, and the salvation of souls.

Reform in Brotherly Love

The final, and most important, area of reform involved the Anabaptist’s views and practices about the relationships between fellow Christians. They saw that far from being a formal, ritualistic organization that simply attends weekly meetings, regardless of having close relationships with one another, the body of Jesus as described in the New Testament is a family. This is chiefly demonstrated by the lives of Jakob Hutter and the Bruderhof community under him. Well into the Anabaptist movement, this group of believers joined together in communal living to provide for one another’s needs that had been stolen or destroyed by their persecutors. Eventually, they came to be known as “the Hutterites.”

Yet it wasn’t just this community that practiced sacrificial care for one another, but most of the Anabaptists. This was mainly due to the fact that most of them were true believers, since they were putting their lives on the line by following New Testament baptism and Christian living. They had to truly be serious about following the Lord if they wanted to be an Anabaptist.

Their law, moreso than the Reformed churches was brotherly love, as commanded by the Lord in John 13:34. They diligently sought to carry out this commandment to “love one another, even as I have loved you”. Due to this, they shared their possessions with one another, as the early Christians did.

Further, rather than leading by a dominating personality, threats, or an air of superiority, their leaders led by example. Nearly all of the main leaders of the Anabaptists took this to the extreme in that they suffered imprisonment, torture, and usually death for preaching and practicing believer’s baptism. Among the many leaders that went to their deaths for their convictions were the first of the movement in Zurich, as well as a couple of leaders who did great work in Austria and Germany.

True Reformers are Often Unpopular and Disregarded

If the story of the Anabaptists teaches us anything of relevance in our current situation as Western Christians, it’s that believers who are most in keeping with New Testament Christianity are often the least respected, and the most opposed. It also shows us that allying with the states and powerful men of the world never brings true reform of Christianity or society. Only the Word of God can accomplish such spiritual ends.

The Reformers error wasn’t only in that they viewed the body of Christ as intimately connected to the governments and societies of nations, but that in so doing, they inevitably employed unbelievers in their efforts to impose the gospel on people. And this resulted in the need to use force, since the worldly people and forces they used were diametrically opposed to biblical Christianity, such as the Anabaptists preached and lived.

In contrast, the Anabaptists rejected this unholy alliance of worldly institutions with am ostensibly Christian church, in favor of keeping themselves set apart as a holy people for God’s own possession. As such, they were threatened, hindered, and often destroyed by even the nominally Protestant governments under which they lived. Since they didn’t have the sword of the state on their side, the main weapon they used was the sword of the Spirit — the Word of God. And this message accomplished far more than what any institution, force, or threat could by the Reformers. Instead of simply compelling people to outwardly embrace a creed and religious custom that many people had no heartfelt conviction about, the preaching and lives of the Anabaptists actually changed hearts, so sinners were saved, and saints were sanctified.

Finally, although the Anabaptists eventually became a tiny, rejected, and uninfluential group of separated believers in central Europe, they did have a huge impact on the course of the body’s progression. This is because the very main tenets that they preached and lived out became the same ones that the later Baptists would come to discover, embrace, teach and preach. And from the Baptists came the first major missionary movement, the championing of the separation of church and state, and most recently, even more reform in Christian beliefs, community, and practices

So, I challenge you — will you follow the comfortable path of the magisterial Reformers, and be content with using worldly means to advance the gospel, or will you bear the reproach of going against the tide of worldliness by practicing and teaching the unpopular and neglected truths of Scripture? Isn’t the Lord’s glory worth all of our efforts to be as faithful to His teaching as possible? Then it’s time to follow the Anabaptists in seeking needed and life-changing revival and reform among western believers. The specific areas that need addressing will have to be reserved for another article.